DOCSLIB.ORG

Thermal Energy Corporation Combined Heat and Power Project, Houston, Texas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thermal Energy Corporation Combined Heat and Power Project, Houston, Texas DOE/EA-1740 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE THERMAL ENERGY CORPORATION COMBINED HEAT AND POWER PROJECT, HOUSTON, TEXAS U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory July 2010 DOE/EA-1740 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE THERMAL ENERGY CORPORATION COMBINED HEAT AND POWER PROJECT, HOUSTON, TEXAS U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory July 2010 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Recovery Act American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) Btu British thermal units CFR Code of Federal Regulations CHP combined heat and power DOE U.S. Department of Energy (also called the Department) EA environmental assessment EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency HRSG heat recovery steam generator NEPA National Environmental Policy Act, as amended NSR new source review PSD prevention of significant deterioration SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer TAC Texas Administrative Code TECO Thermal Energy Corporation TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Note: Numbers in this EA generally have been rounded to two or three significant figures. Therefore, some total values might not equal the actual sums of the values. COVER SHEET Responsible Agency: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Title: Final Environmental Assessment for Thermal Energy Corporation Combined Heat and Power Project, Houston, Texas (DOE/EA-1740) Contact: For additional copies or more information concerning this environmental assessment (EA), please contact: Mark W. Lusk Office of Project Facilitation & Compliance U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory 3610 Collins Ferry Road P.O. Box 880, MS B07 Morgantown, WV 26507-0880 Email: [email protected] Abstract: DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to the Thermal Energy Corporation to facilitate installation of a combined heat and power system (CHP), water chillers, and cooling tower at a district power plant that supplies the energy, heating, and cooling needs of the Texas Medical Center campus in Houston, Harris County, Texas. This EA analyzes the potential environmental consequences of DOE’s Proposed Action to provide the Recovery Act grant, Thermal Energy Corporation’s proposed project of installing and operating a CHP system, and the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated in detail potential impacts to air quality, sound levels, water resources, health and safety, and socioeconomics. After performing a screening analysis of other environmental resource areas, DOE concluded that impacts to other aspects of the environment would not be likely to occur or would not be detectable. The proposed project would be designed and operated in compliance with federal and Texas air quality regulations, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and have a net beneficial impact on air quality in the region. Operation of the CHP system would cause a small increase in noise outdoors near the adjacent medical facilities. Installation of the CHP system in a floodplain would not adversely impact natural and beneficial floodplain values or increase risks to lives or property. The project would have no or only small impacts to surface water quality and future availability of potable water in the Houston area, and would not cause significant hazards to workers or the public at the Central Plant. Manufacturing and installation of the equipment would result in a minor to moderate, temporary beneficial impact to the economy. Incremental increase in cumulative impacts from the proposed project, relative to impacts from other activities in the surrounding area, would be negligible to small. DOE/EA-1740 iii Availability: DOE encourages public participation in the NEPA process. A Notice of Availability was placed in the Houston Chronicle on May 22, 23, and 24, 2010. The Draft EA was made available for public review on DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) web site and at the Harris County Library, West University Branch, 6108 Auden, Houston, Texas, from May 22 through June 5, 2010. This Final EA is available on DOE’s NETL web site at http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/others/nepa/ea.html. DOE/EA-1740 iv Contents CONTENTS Section Page Summary ........................................................................................................................................ ix 1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 1.1 National Environmental Policy Act and Related Procedures ...........................................2 1.2 Background .......................................................................................................................2 1.3 Purpose and Need .............................................................................................................4 1.4 Environmental Resources Not Carried Forward ...............................................................5 1.5 Consultations and Public Comment Response Process ....................................................7 1.5.1 Consultations................................................................................................................7 1.5.2 Comment-Response Process ........................................................................................7 2 DOE Proposed Action and Alternatives ...................................................................................9 2.1 DOE’s Proposed Action ....................................................................................................9 2.2 TECO’s Proposed Project .................................................................................................9 2.2.1 CHP System Components ..........................................................................................13 2.2.2 Water Chillers and Cooling Tower ............................................................................14 2.3 No-Action Alternative ....................................................................................................15 2.4 Alternatives .....................................................................................................................15 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences .....................................................16 3.1 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................16 3.1.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................16 3.1.1.1 Wind and Ambient Air Quality Conditions ....................................................... 16 3.1.1.2 Air Quality Conformity ...................................................................................... 17 3.1.1.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................ 18 3.1.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................................18 3.1.2.1 Proposed Project ................................................................................................ 18 3.1.2.2 No-Action Alternative ....................................................................................... 22 3.2 Noise ...............................................................................................................................23 3.2.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................23 DOE/EA-1740 v Contents 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................................25 3.2.3 Proposed Project ........................................................................................................25 3.2.3.1 No-Action Alternative ....................................................................................... 26 3.3 Water Resources .............................................................................................................27 3.3.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................27 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................................28 3.3.2.1 Proposed Project ................................................................................................ 28 3.3.2.2 No-Action Alternative ....................................................................................... 29 3.4 Socioeconomics ..............................................................................................................29 3.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................30 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................................30 3.4.2.1 Proposed Project ................................................................................................ 30 3.4.2.2 No-Action Alternative ....................................................................................... 31 3.5 Occupational Health and Safety ......................................................................................31 3.5.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................31
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Houston-Galveston, Texas Managing Coastal Subsidence
    HOUSTON-GALVESTON, TEXAS Managing coastal subsidence TEXAS he greater Houston area, possibly more than any other Lake Livingston A N D S metropolitan area in the United States, has been adversely U P L L affected by land subsidence. Extensive subsidence, caused T A S T A mainly by ground-water pumping but also by oil and gas extraction, O C T r has increased the frequency of flooding, caused extensive damage to Subsidence study area i n i t y industrial and transportation infrastructure, motivated major in- R i v vestments in levees, reservoirs, and surface-water distribution facili- e S r D N ties, and caused substantial loss of wetland habitat. Lake Houston A L W O Although regional land subsidence is often subtle and difficult to L detect, there are localities in and near Houston where the effects are Houston quite evident. In this low-lying coastal environment, as much as 10 L Galveston feet of subsidence has shifted the position of the coastline and A Bay T changed the distribution of wetlands and aquatic vegetation. In fact, S A Texas City the San Jacinto Battleground State Historical Park, site of the battle O Galveston that won Texas independence, is now partly submerged. This park, C Gulf of Mexico about 20 miles east of downtown Houston on the shores of Galveston Bay, commemorates the April 21, 1836, victory of Texans 0 20 Miles led by Sam Houston over Mexican forces led by Santa Ana. About 0 20 Kilometers 100 acres of the park are now under water due to subsidence, and A road (below right) that provided access to the San Jacinto Monument was closed due to flood- ing caused by subsidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Floodway Buyout Strategy for a Resilient Houston a Systems Approach to Breaking the Dangerous and Expensive Cycle of Rebuilding in the Floodway
    April 2020 Floodway Buyout Strategy for a Resilient Houston A Systems Approach to Breaking the Dangerous and Expensive Cycle of Rebuilding in the Floodway Erica Vilay, Master in Public Policy Candidate, 2020 Phil Pollman, Master in Public Policy Candidate, 2020 Prepared for Advised by Offices of Recovery and Resilience, Professor Juliette Kayyem City of Houston Professor Julie Boatright Wilson Professor Christopher Avery Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Public Policy. This Policy Analysis Exercise reflects the views of the author(s) and should not be viewed as representing the views of the PAE's external client(s), nor those of Harvard University or any of its faculty. Front Cover: Residential neighborhoods near the Interstate 10 sit in floodwater in the wake of Hurricane Harvey on August 29, 2017 in Houston, Texas. (Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images) Above: Debris from inside homes hit by Hurricane Harvey (©AdobeStock) About this Policy Analysis Report This policy report was developed by two public policy graduate students as part of their Policy Analysis Exercise, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Public Policy from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. This document was developed over an academic year, October 2019 to April 2020, for the Offices of Recovery and Resilience at the City of Houston. The findings, analysis, and recommendations were developed through an in-depth literature review and interviews with public servants and academic experts. This report builds directly on the work of the Office of Resilience and the Office of Recovery’s recent publications, “Living with Water” and “Resilient Houston 2050 Strategy.” The field of climate adaptation and managed retreat is new, requiring urgent research and testing through applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Houston Fifth Ward Area Flood Mitigation
    HOUSTON FIFTH WARD AREA FLOOD MITIGATION ALDINE BENDER 8 BW ¯ x Miles CDBG – MIT COH & Potential Partnership Projects 00.02.5511.522.533.544.555.566.577.588.59 Market Square Scope of The Fifth Ward area is bounded to the north by Quitman Street, Cochran Street on the Work west, Buffalo Bayou on the south and Lockwood Drive on the east.The majority of the area drains directly to Buffalo Bayou; portions north of Quitman Street drain to Hunting Bayou. The project consists of a 1.5 mile drainage trunk system on Gregg Street from Liberty to Buffalo Bayou. Market Square is located in east Houston, south of IH-10, between Lockwood and Hirsch Rd. The project will improve drainage infrastructure with upgraded storm trunk on Buck St., Schweikhardt St.,and Coke St. The drainage system will also include a new 3 x 108-inch trunk system tying to Japhet Creek. CDBG-MIT $115,021,697 Cost Estimate Structures Impacted Structures Impacted Roadway Inundation Roadway Inundation (100-year) Existing (100-year) Proposed Miles Miles Structures (100-year) Existing (100-year) Proposed Impacted and Roadway 13 Inundation 1,367 326 with greater than 3.71 6-inches (topping curb) in 100-year event For more info or questions contact: [email protected] HOUSTON KASHMERE GARDENS AREA FLOOD MITIGATION ALDINE BENDER 8 BW ¯ x Miles CDBG – MIT COH & Potential Partnership Projects 00.02.5511.522.533.544.555.566.577.588.59 Scope of The project area is located in the eastern half of the Kashmere Gardens neighborhood, Work bounded by Wipprech St.
    [Show full text]
  • Brays Bayou Above Tidal (Unclassified Water Body) Segment: 1007B San Jacinto River Basin
    2004 Texas Water Quality Inventory Page : 1 (based on data from 03/01/1996 to 02/28/2001) Brays Bayou Above Tidal (unclassified water body) Segment: 1007B San Jacinto River Basin Basin number: 10 Basin group: C Water body description: Perennial stream from 11.5 km upstream of confluence with Houston Ship Channel up to SH 6 Water body classification: Unclassified Water body type: Freshwater Stream Water body length / area: 19.7 Miles Water body uses: Aquatic Life Use, Contact Recreation Use, Fish Consumption Use Standards Not Met in 2002 Assessment Area Use Support Status Parameter Category From 11.5km upstream of confluence Contact Recreation Use Not Supporting bacteria 5a with Houston Ship Channel (Brays Bayou Tidal) to SH 6 Additional Information: The aquatic life use is fully supported. The fish consumption use was not assessed. 2002 Concerns: Assessment Area Use or Concern Concern Status Description of Concern From 11.5km upstream of confluence Nutrient Enrichment Concern Concern ammonia with Houston Ship Channel (Brays Bayou Tidal) to SH 6 From 11.5km upstream of confluence Nutrient Enrichment Concern Concern nitrate+nitrite nitrogen with Houston Ship Channel (Brays Bayou Tidal) to SH 6 From 11.5km upstream of confluence Nutrient Enrichment Concern Concern orthophosphorus with Houston Ship Channel (Brays Bayou Tidal) to SH 6 From 11.5km upstream of confluence Nutrient Enrichment Concern Concern total phosphorus with Houston Ship Channel (Brays Bayou Tidal) to SH 6 Monitoring sites used: Assessment Area Station ID Station Description
    [Show full text]
  • Bayous and Galveston Bay Report Card - with Additional Details
    Bayous and Galveston Bay Report Card - With Additional Details Water Recreation Safety (fecal bacteria): Bayous: C Galveston Bay: A Action Items: Report sewage spills, collect pet waste, proper maintenance of septic and aerobic on-site sewage treatment, and pump out boat sewage in designated facilities Dissolved Oxygen (aquatic life health): Bayous: A Galveston Bay: A Action Items: preserve and restore habitats by planting native plants and removing invasive, exotic species; slow runoff by reducing paved areas, use rain gardens and rainfall harvesting Phosphorus (eutrophication/ algae blooms): Bayous: C Galveston Bay: B Action Items: Proper use of fertilizers, use of slow release and organic plant fertilizers; avoid or reduce phosphates in cleaning products Nitrogen (eutrophication/ algae blooms): Bayous: A Galveston Bay: B Action Items: Proper use of fertilizers, use of slow release and organic plant fertilizers Litter and Trash (wildlife entanglement/ingestion, aesthetics): Bayous: I Galveston Bay: I Action Items: Participate in clean-ups, clean your surroundings, report littering and illegal dumping, dispose of trash properly and encourage others to do the same Grades: A = Excellent B = Good C = Adequate for now D = Requires Action F = Critical I = Insufficient Data (since Texas does not measure floatable debris as a water quality standard in the manner it does other pollutants) For additional details on this report card, see the Details below. Additional details on the Galveston Bay conditions and grading methodology are at: www.galvbaygrade.org
    [Show full text]
  • 1 3 4 2 Regional Bikeway Spines Conceptual Plan
    - 9.2 Miles 3.3 Miles 3.4 Miles 5.2 Miles NORTHEAST Hardy - Elysian - Kelley CENTRAL Austin Corridor EAST Polk - Cullen 1 SOUTHEAST Calhoun - Griggs - MLK Extents: Buffalo Bayou to LBJ Hospital Neighborhoods: Near Northside; Kashmere Gardens; Fifth Ward 2 Destinations: LBJ Hospital; Kashmere Transit Center; 4 HISD schools; Buffalo Bayou Future Connections/Improvements Buffalo Bayou (BG2020); Downtown (Austin Street); Hunting Bayou (BG2020); Fifth Ward (Lyons) Extents: Buffalo Bayou to Hermann Park (Brays Bayou) Neighborhoods: 3 Downtown; Midtown; Museum Park Destinations: Buffalo Bayou; Downtown/Midtown jobs and at tractions; Museum District; Hermann Park Future Connections/Improvements Hermann Park Trails (Master Plan); Buffalo Bayou trail (BG2020) Extents: Lamar Cycle Track to Brays Bayou Neighborhoods: Downtown; East Downtown; Eastwood; Third Ward; MacGregor Destinations: Downtown/GRB; Bastrop Promenade; Columbia 4 Tap; UniversityTap; of Houston; TSU; Brays Bayou Future Connections/Improvements Includes HC Pct. 1 Cullen reconstruction project from IH 45 to Brays Bayou Extents: Brays Bayou to Sims Bayou OATES Neighborhoods: MacGregor; OST/South Union; South Acres; Sunnyside Destinations: UH; Brays Bayou; MacGregor Park; Palm Center; Sims Bayou Future Connections/Improvements Park system along Sims Bayou (BG2020) E MERCURY L A D D T N O ALLEN GENOA O O W R A N N E L E OATES C L L COLLEGE A M U A E B 45 W FIDELITY D R A ALMEDA GENOA ALMEDA MESA GELLHORN W O H MESA CENTRAL STON WINKLER LVE A R G E T S 610 MONROE HOUSTON [ E H C N A A O
    [Show full text]
  • Houston Resiliency
    *¤ ű lţţţ Fd9 * Bl&l* *|l& G *C*:&*ũ Celebrating 75 Years of Excellence IN 2017, THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS TEXAS SECTION GRADED SEVEN CATEGORIES IN ITS G.P.A. REPORT CARD FOR TEXAS INFRASTRUCTURE: AVIATION, BRIDGES, DAMS, DRINKING WATER, FLOOD CONTROL, HIGHWAYS/ROADS AND WASTEWATER. THESE GRADES 76% OF TEXAS INFRASTRUCTURE IGH WERE DEVISED FROM KEY FACTS AND DATA POINTS 1,212 H EDERAL PPROACHING THE ABOUT EACH AREA OF INFRASTRUCTURE. FLOOD F A CONTROL AND DAMS, TWO CATEGORIES OF RISK DAMS DISTASERS ARE END OF ITS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE CRITICAL TO RESILIENCY AND STORM C- MANAGEMENT, RECEIVED GRADES OF D, MEANING THE FLOOD RELATED LIFE INFRASTRUCTURE IS POOR AND AT RISK. W HY LEADERSHIP & PLANNING PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE FLOOD CONTROL DAMS INVESTMENT SMART INVESTMENT WILL ONLY BE WE HAVE TO UTILIZE NEW WE CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO POSSIBLE WITH LEADERSHIP, APPROACHES, MATERIALS, AND DEFER INVESTMENT IN OUR NATION’S PLANNING, AND A CLEAR VISION FOR TECHNOLOGIES TO ENSURE OUR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS. OUR NATION’S INFRASTRUCTURE. INFRASTRUCTURE IS MORE RESILIENT. W H A T D D FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE TEXAS REPORT CARD, PLEASE VISIT infrastructurereportcard.org/Texas TELL CONGRESS TALK ABOUT THE ASK FOR FUNDING TELL CONGRESS TO MAKE LARGE-SCALE REPORT CARD GRADE WRITE YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WHILE WE HAVE MADE SOME PROGRESS, AND ASK THEM TO FUND THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS WILL ALLOW REVERSING THE TRAJECTORY AFTER DAM REHABILITATION PROGRAM SO STATES TO LEVERAGE LOCAL AND PRIVATE DECADES OF UNDERINVESTMENT IN OUR THAT OUR STATE’S “D” DAMS CAN FUNDING AND RAISE THE CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRES RECEIVE THE INVESTMENT THEY NEED.
    [Show full text]
  • Buffalo Bayou East Master Plan Brings the Community’S Vision for Its Waterfront to Life
    Authentic Connected Inclusive Resilient A VISION FOR BUFFALO BAYOU EAST BUFFALO BAYOU PARTNERSHIP MICHAEL VAN VALKENBURGH ASSOCIATES Landscape Architecture HR&A ADVISORS Economic Development HUITT-ZOLLARS Engineering and Transportation LIMNOTECH Hydrology UTILE Urban Design and Architecture The Buffalo Bayou East Master Plan brings the community’s vision for its waterfront to life. Like other cities such as New York, Boston and St. Louis While most of Buffalo Bayou Partnership’s green space where Frederick Law Olmstead designed park systems, development has occurred west of Downtown, for more Houston hired Cambridge, Massachusetts landscape than a decade the organization has been acquiring architect Arthur Coleman Comey in 1912 to provide property and building a nascent trail system along the a plan that would guide the city’s growth. In his plan, waterway’s East Sector. The Buffalo Bayou East Master Houston: Tentative Plans for Its Development, Comey Plan brings the community’s vision for its waterfront asserted: “The backbone of a park system for Houston to life. Informed by significant outreach and engagement, will naturally be its creek valleys, which readily lend the plan envisions integrating new parks and trails, themselves to ‘parking’ … All the bayous should dynamic recreational and cultural destinations, and be ‘parked’ except where utilized for commerce.” connections to surrounding neighborhoods. Building upon Comey’s vision, Buffalo Bayou Partnership’s This plan is an important step forward for the future of (BBP) 2002 Buffalo Bayou and Beyond Master Plan Houston’s historic bayou—a project that will take decades and envisioned a network of green spaces along the Bayou require creative partnerships to unfold.
    [Show full text]
  • I-1 2015 MEMORIAL DAY FLOOD in HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS Michael D. Talbott, P.E. Abstract After Weeks of Intermittent Rainfall Acros
    Proceedings THC-IT-2015 Conference & Exhibition 2015 MEMORIAL DAY FLOOD IN HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS Michael D. Talbott, P.E. Executive Director Harris County Flood Control District 9900 Northwest Freeway Houston, Texas 77092 Email: [email protected] , web: www.hcfcd.org Abstract After weeks of intermittent rainfall across Harris County, a slow moving line of thunderstorms moved into Harris County from central Texas during the evening hours of May 25, 2015. Very heavy rainfall began around 8:30 p.m. across the northern portions of Harris County, while additional thunderstorms developed over central Fort Bend County and moved into Harris County from the southwest. A period of thunderstorm cell training occurred from 10:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. from Fort Bend County into north- central Harris County where the cells merged with the line of storms moving southward from northern Harris County. Thunderstorm cell mergers continued over central and southwest Harris County for several hours resulting in widespread significant flooding. A “Flash Flood Emergency” was issued by the National Weather Service for Harris County at 10:52 p.m. on the 25th for the first time ever (although this is a relatively new terminology). The worst rainfall was focused across the western portion of Harris County from the northwest side of the City of Houston to Addicks, Sharpstown, and Richmond in central Fort Bend County. Hundreds of water rescues were performed by various agencies during the height of the rainfall on the 25th and 26th. Rescues were mainly motorists stranded on area freeways and roadways, and after daylight on the 26th, the Houston Fire Department responded to many requests for assistance from residents in flooded homes.
    [Show full text]
  • How's the Water?
    This story was made with Esri's Story Map Cascade. Read it on the web at http://arcg.is/1OKTKW. How’s the Water? 2018 Houston-Galveston Area Council Basin Highlights Report Watershed Characterizations for the Houston Ship Channel/Buffalo Bayou Tidal, Chocolate Bayou Tidal, and Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal Clean water is essential. Just as clean water is essential for life itself, it is also essential for the quality of our lives. Water is all around us. It flows through rural areas, our neighborhoods, and our cities. These waterways come in all shapes and sizes, from small drainage ditches and meandering creeks to seemingly lazy bayous and major rivers. All of them connect to one of the most productive estuaries in the nation, Galveston Bay, and ultimately the Gulf of Mexico. We walk and picnic near them, splash, swim, fish, and sail on them. Keeping them clean must be a priority for all of us. These waters help fuel a strong economy, bringing in billions of dollars a year and providing tens of thousands of jobs in commercial and recreational fishing and tourism. The 2018 Basin Highlights Report provides an overview of water quality and data trends in the Houston- Galveston region’s surface waters. Houston Ship Channel This report characterizes the Houston Ship Channel/Buffalo Bayou Tidal (Segment 1007), Chocolate Bayou Tidal (Segment 1107), and Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal (Segment 1108) watersheds to identify • Specific water quality issues and trends. • Sources of point and nonpoint pollution. • Current strategies and plans to reduce pollution within these watersheds. • Current and potential stakeholders working within these watersheds Since 1991, the Texas Clean Rivers Program (link: https://www.tceq.texas.gov/waterquality/clean-rivers) (CRP) has provided a framework for addressing water quality issues through an all-inclusive watershed approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Motivation: Brays Bayou Development Task: Bayou Modifications & Bridge
    Brays Bayou Modifications & Greenbriar Bridge Redesign Julianne Crawford, Marie Gleichauf, Avi Gori, Sam Greivell, Jinal Mehta, Kasia Nikiel, Civil & Environmental Engineering, Rice University Motivation: Brays Bayou Development Proposed Bayou Modifications & Greenbriar Bridge Comparison of Bayou Modeling Results Cantilever Method 1 Method 2 1920s Channelization of original Brays Bayou Weir Elev. 42’ Clay • Modeled detention two Retaining Wall Spillway Weir Liner ways for validation 5’ 1950s Brays Bayou is lined with concrete Rip Rap Lateral Structure Backfill • Method 1: detention 61° simulated in HEC-HMS 2001 Tropical Storm Allison (500-yr) – $5 billion in damages to Houston 4’ x 4’ Outlet Detention Pond – Cross Section Weir – Side View Retaining Walls Flow Diversion • Method 2: detention Storage Area 2004 USACE and HCFCD begin Project Brays modifications simulated in HEC-RAS 100-Year Water Surface Profile Comparison 2015 Memorial Day storm (100-yr) – 1185 Houston homes flooded • Unsteady HEC-RAS 80 model and MATLAB 70 60 2016 Our proposed modifications added to Project Brays script developed to size 50 40 WSE (ft) WSE control structures 30 20 2021 Scheduled completion of Project Brays 10 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 Distance Upstream (ft) Task: Bayou Modifications & Bridge Redesign HMS Model RAS Model Memorial Day 2015 Case Study • Reduce the 100-year floodplain in the watershed by targeting two areas: Damage Cost (Brays) Damage Cost (RW) Percent Cost Reduction Meyerland and the Texas Medical Center Home 1
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Flooding in Houston: a Disaster in the Making
    Urban Flooding in Houston: A Disaster in the Making Dr. Phil Bedient Herman Brown Professor of Engineering Cypress Creek April 2016 TS Allison (2001) and May 2015 Floods Brays during Memorial Day Flood – May 2015 Factors Affecting Flooding Rapidly expanding development as well as natural hydrologic/topographic factors make Houston extremely vulnerable to flooding Frequency of Houston Floods: 1976, 1983, 1989, 1992, 1994, 1998 2001, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2015, 2016 Houston’s Flood Issues Flat topography Intense rainfalls Clay soils Impervious area Urbanization URBANIZATION Nearly 500,000 people moved to Houston between 1990 and 2010. Land Use Changes in Brays Watershed Land use - 1970 Low Intensity Development Medium Intensity Development High Intensity Development Green Space Land use - 2010 Brays Bayou Meyerland Sugar Land Ft Bend Sugar Land Sugar Land FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Areal Extent of 100-Year Floodplains Current Brays Bayou Watershed 100-yr Floodplain FEMA 100-YR Floodplain Meyerland 85% of Meyerland is in the 100-yr Floodplain FEMA 100-YR Floodplain Floodplain % Meyer Land 85% Woodlands 21% Sugar Land 20% Sugar Land 20% of Sugar Land is in the 100-yr Floodplain Memorial Day Flood 2015 (May 25-26, 2015) I-45 and Main St. 12-hr Rainfall at USGS Gages . Brays Bayou Watershed received 11 inches of rain in 12 hrs (equivalent to 100-yr return period storm) . Storm fueled by jet stream positioned directly over central and east Texas and moisture originating from the Gulf of Mexico . Estimated 2,600 residential damages in Houston (1,185 in Brays Bayou watershed) S. Gessner and Bissonett (Photos from Houston Chronicle) Project Brays .
    [Show full text]